I remember exactly where I was when I heard about this one the news and who I was with. So when that same friend tried the "makes you wonder crap" I gave them 6 shades of hell.

This same person, however, does not think everyone is out to take their guns, bear. They just tend to be a bit paranoid at the worst of times but if you put actual logic and facts in front of them, they let said logic and facts ooze over them.

It's quite sad and I dunno... It's how humans cope with things sometimes. We don't like to think that horrible stuff can happen for no reason because then it could happen to us for no reason and that's scary. So sometimes people victim blame as a way to make it seem like what happened was deserved or fake or something. That way we feel like if we don't do the wrong thing, it won't happen to us.

I don't understand how people can harass others like this though. It's awful and my heart goes out to these families that have enough to deal with without the harassment.

There are people who believe that the Tucson shooting was faked too, and leave abusive comments on YouTube videos about Gabby Giffords, accusing her of faking brain injury. I wonder: do those people think all mass shootings were fake? San Ysidro, Edmond, Luby's, Columbine, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Tucson, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Navy Yard, Charleston, Kalamazoo and so on - were those all faked by the evil government to justify a gun grab? Where is it then? The government couldn't even pass a law about background checks after Sandy Hook.

There have been mass shootings for decades, and yet guns remain, and they will remain. If the government was faking massacres to create support for gun control, they should've realized by now that it isn't working.

11

As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being. --Carl Jung

I sorta study this stuff. Thought processes of people who believe things that are outlandish are interesting to me. I have no real credentials and could only favorably be called amateur so grain of salt and what not.

Aquila89 wrote:I wonder: do those people think all mass shootings were fake

Basically, yes. In one way or another. I wanted to go through your list but that would require a lot of explaining that I think I can summarize better in a sentence or two. Some are ploys to get your guns some are to make a profit some are because the democrats want to kill patriots some are because of the lizard people but the more important part is the next one...

If the government was faking massacres to create support for gun control, they should've realized by now that it isn't working.

This is a major point that 'these people' think. It is because of their "actions" that we still have [blank]. Be it guns or no fema death camps etc. They are making a difference! It's like the article said, they see the world 'out of control' and would rather it not be so create a world where they are fighting against it and think they are doing so successfully. "the united nations hasn't poisoned the water supply because we are on to them!" It's a backwards rationality.

Anyone remember the 'victims of gang-stalking'? There are some funny youtube vids about how "that guy on a bike is totally harassing me by riding by but luckily I caught him on camera so he can't...[something idk]

I actually wanted to quote the whole thing cause I mostly agree but it's right above me and just wanted to comment on some points there. It seems to be a coping mechanism but I think the better way to explain it was in the article. It is about the scary world but more importantly about ones level of control. There are even more delusions about things that have no relation to tragedies. Like landing on the moon or global warming (remember it is not a real thing to these types). And to the final line, they are fighting for 'whats right' in their brains. That is something similar they have with 'assholes on the internet'. Trolls and moon landing deniers both think "your response shows I'm right" especially when it is provably not the case.

sunglasses wrote:they let said logic and facts ooze over them.

Over and past from my experience. You're lucky. The best I've been able to do was talk down a person from "they planted thermite in WTC" to "they counted on the towers falling" and that was my best ever lol. It does require in person communication though. I'd never try this over the web.

I don't know if yall saw but there was at least one person in the comments asking to see the dead body of the contributors child as proof. D'ya think that would have worked? Of course not. They are stuck and the best I can do is point them to snopes in hope that maybe they are unaware...of my lizard NWO takeover!

It's not just the conspiracy theorists. All the nuts decided to hand their idée fixe on the Sandy Hook.

I remember an article by some grumpy old conservative in the National Post (I believe. Or some other reasonably respectable newspaper.) who blamed it on the feminization of our schools.

Apparently, if there were more male teachers in the school, they would have been able to overpower the guy with a machine gun. Alternatively, if they had had male teachers to influence them in manliness, "even the huskier twelve-year-old boys" would have brought him down through the magic of testosterone.

The guy was obviously disconnected from reality. What kind of person looks at 26 dead children and teachers, and says "Well, they would have survived if they were more badass"? Get your brain out of a stupid fucking action movie already.

10

Then the LORD said to me, "Go again, love a woman who is loved by her husband, yet an adulteress, even as the LORD loves the sons of Israel, though they turn to other gods and love raisin cakes."

Conspiracy theorists often feel that they have no control over their lives in the grand scheme of things, but their theories at least assure them that there is a grand scheme... That's their mindset: In a world where parents sometimes see their children murdered, the conspiracy theorists are really the ones in the middle of the story. It's all about them.

I know/am related to some hardcore conspiracy theory believers, and this is a pretty apt description. I have little to no idea how to counteract such thinking, but it tells me that there's really no point in arguing about whatever the theory holds. To actually change minds, I'd have to address the outlook behind the views.

12

JamishT was a heck of a guy,With a devilish twinkle in his eye.With his hand-picked flowers,And his feel-good powers,He made all the girls blush and sigh.

JamishT wrote:I know/am related to some hardcore conspiracy theory believers, and this is a pretty apt description. I have little to no idea how to counteract such thinking, but it tells me that there's really no point in arguing about whatever the theory holds. To actually change minds, I'd have to address the outlook behind the views.

I liked the part in the middle that was left out "at least someone is controlling things even if they're evil"

Not what I meant to reply to though. I agree with that. It's similar to creationists. You'll never be able to convince one that their beliefs are unfounded. "I know it cause I know it" is not an argument vulnerable to proofs. The best one can do is plant a seed and hope they water it themselves. "are you worried about the hells of other religions?" "So is the government incompetent or capable of mass conspiracies?"

Just have fun with it. You know that you can't change their minds but you can help them explore their own, all socratic like. "If you're a truth seeker, what evidence could convince you to change your mind?" "If you think there are things we can't know, should we make assumptions about those things?" ect ect. It hardly ever works but it can be fun as long as they aren't the punchy type ;)

SandTea wrote:Just have fun with it. You know that you can't change their minds but you can help them explore their own, all socratic like. "If you're a truth seeker, what evidence could convince you to change your mind?" "If you think there are things we can't know, should we make assumptions about those things?" ect ect. It hardly ever works but it can be fun as long as they aren't the punchy type ;)

And if all else fails, just shout "They're coming for you!" at them without any context.

I wonder if there's also an element to the conspiracy theorists' thinking - which I think was briefly touched on the article - that it's partly a way to rationalise the horrible things that can happen in the world. It's interesting that they believe Sandy Hook is completely fake, and not that the government somehow made Adam Lanza murder those people. I think it shows the bizarre wishful thinking on these people's part - they want to believe there's really a shadowy cabal running everything, because that explains how bad things can happen and gives them a sense of importance because they think they see things as they really are, but then they also seem to want to believe this is a world where kids can't be massacred - if something that bad happens, even the evil shadowy cabal must have only faked it.

Aquila89 wrote:But isn't it all the same in the end? If faking massacres doesn't pave the ground to gun control because of the efforts of truthers, it's still a strategy that doesn't work.

Yes.

Ok, I should probably elaborate. It's not the truthers (in their eyes) that are the dumb ones you see. Truthers are the ones who, while quite creative in theories, cant think of a way the gov would try other than these schemes. It's the strangely competent yet dumb government that are the folks thinking "this could still work" not the conspiracy bunch. Each one being a new attempt that is thwarted by their ever vigilant votes and another instance where they can find more 'evidence' to support their pet theory. It also helps in getting people on their side. Lizard monarchies are a joke but they act as a sort of inoculation to the "less crazy" ideas put forth. The "sure, but"s as I call them. "sure terrorists did 911 but the cia trained them".